I never finished American Gods. Things got hectic at home and I returned the book back to the library. Two months later, I signed myself up to get Social Studies certified and I needed a book that could cram as much history into me as I could get in a little more than a month.
World History for Dummies by Peter Haugen is a crash course in, well, world history. But it teaches it in such a way that you'll remember. And it teaches you things you didn't (or couldn't) learn in high school. Such as Vasco de Gama. Seriously, do you know who this guy is? You might know he was an explorer, but what he explored/founded, you may not remember. Well, he found a way to India by going around the tip of Africa. But this guy was an @$$hole. After his men, left to spy on the Indian ruler, were killed (for spying, of course), de Gama became extremely militaristic, killed Muslims (who he blamed for killing his men) and sent a shipload of body parts to the Indian ruler. Lovely!! (And memorable!)
It's also not like your history textbook in that it's not in sequential order. There's different sections, such as Civilizations, and it goes through different civilizations and how they were all interconnected. But it's written so lightheartedly, so...smoothly, that you're not bombarded with names and dates that you can't grasp.
One thing that IS annoying and you will be bombarded with is constant references to other chapters/sections. The book can be read any way you want. You want to learn about Egyptians - check out this chapter, this chapter, and this chapter. You don't have to read every page or section. I am, however. And that makes reading slightly annoying because every paragraph or so has a note about other chapters/sections I can read to find out more about a particular culture, person, or topic. It's not in the margins. It's in parentheses IN the paragraph.
Nonetheless, it's a great book. I'm 150 pages in and I'm confident enough to give this book an 8 out of 10. Way to teach history!!!
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Lies My Teacher Told Me - Reviewed
My rating for this book - 9/10.
So, I finally finished reading Lies My Teacher Told Me last weekend. It's such an eye-opening book about history textbooks and social studies education in general that I don't really know where to begin. I suppose I'll say that my favorite parts of the book are when the Loewen discusses how textbooks talk about American history as a series of events that were "inevitable" because America always makes "progress." But that progress is almost grotesque when you think about all the people American screwed to become a superpower. Textbooks don't address the presidential assassinations we initiated in other countries to set up governments favorable to ours. No, high school history textbooks sugarcoat everything as simply FATE. Yes, we were fated to take over the land now known as the United States from the millions of people who lived here long before Christopher Columbus. It's really a shame that we teach children that this was inevitable, that Indians were just inferior and we, European decedents, were DESTINED to take over.
So, if the book was so good, why do I only give it a 9/10. Well....the first 11 chapters were very well-written, interesting, but the last 2 chapters were a bit of a drag. They just kept repeating the same lessons learned in the other 11 chapters. I'm assuming these chapters were added into the 2007 edition and don't appear in the original 1995 edition of the book. Nonetheless, 9/10 is a great score and I highly recommend reading this book if you ever get a chance.
Next book on my queue - Neil Gaiman's "American Gods."
So, I finally finished reading Lies My Teacher Told Me last weekend. It's such an eye-opening book about history textbooks and social studies education in general that I don't really know where to begin. I suppose I'll say that my favorite parts of the book are when the Loewen discusses how textbooks talk about American history as a series of events that were "inevitable" because America always makes "progress." But that progress is almost grotesque when you think about all the people American screwed to become a superpower. Textbooks don't address the presidential assassinations we initiated in other countries to set up governments favorable to ours. No, high school history textbooks sugarcoat everything as simply FATE. Yes, we were fated to take over the land now known as the United States from the millions of people who lived here long before Christopher Columbus. It's really a shame that we teach children that this was inevitable, that Indians were just inferior and we, European decedents, were DESTINED to take over.
So, if the book was so good, why do I only give it a 9/10. Well....the first 11 chapters were very well-written, interesting, but the last 2 chapters were a bit of a drag. They just kept repeating the same lessons learned in the other 11 chapters. I'm assuming these chapters were added into the 2007 edition and don't appear in the original 1995 edition of the book. Nonetheless, 9/10 is a great score and I highly recommend reading this book if you ever get a chance.
Next book on my queue - Neil Gaiman's "American Gods."
Friday, July 24, 2009
Lies My Teacher Told Me
I finally got a hold of a book I've wanted to read for years - Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong by James W. Loewen. It's been an eyeopener and a pleasure to read. I'm on Chapter 4...which is sort of a lot like Chapter 3 (they both deal with early American Indian relations) and I'm loving it. Why? Well, there's lots of very interesting facts like how "Wall Street" in NYC really got its name. (The Dutch paid the wrong tribe of Indians for Manhattan. So, the tribe that really owned Manhattan started fighting the Dutch. The Dutch built a wall to defend themselves against that tribe.) And Columbus...what a jerk!
I find it interesting, too, how American History textbooks try to make the youth of America more patriotic by downplaying or downright omitting the dark truth about our nation's past. We want to pretend like people didn't live here, that America was virgin territory, but that's not how it was. And we don't want to think about how Europeans enslaved Indians, spread diseases that wiped out a majority of Indians, and played Indians against other tribes! Let's face it---Europeans during 1500-1800....not so nice. I think it is very important for Americans to know the truth about their country's history so they don't wonder why most of the world envies yet despises America. And why some areas of the world are in such turmoil (OMG, can you believe it's because America intervened in their politics?).
This is such a good book that I might buy it, just to have it in my future classroom! Can you imagine a kid picking up a REAL non-fiction book?!
I find it interesting, too, how American History textbooks try to make the youth of America more patriotic by downplaying or downright omitting the dark truth about our nation's past. We want to pretend like people didn't live here, that America was virgin territory, but that's not how it was. And we don't want to think about how Europeans enslaved Indians, spread diseases that wiped out a majority of Indians, and played Indians against other tribes! Let's face it---Europeans during 1500-1800....not so nice. I think it is very important for Americans to know the truth about their country's history so they don't wonder why most of the world envies yet despises America. And why some areas of the world are in such turmoil (OMG, can you believe it's because America intervened in their politics?).
This is such a good book that I might buy it, just to have it in my future classroom! Can you imagine a kid picking up a REAL non-fiction book?!
Monday, July 13, 2009
The God Delusion - Reviewed
My rating for this book - 7/10.
So, I finally finished Richard Dawkins' book, The God Delusion. Yes, yes, I know - it took me 2 months to read, but to be fair, June was not a reading kind of month for me with the new house and all. Anyway, I finished it. I figured out very quickly that the book wasn't what I expected. All the hype about it when it first came out, all the talks I've heard Richard Dawkins' do - I was expecting some sort of blasphemous book that blows religion out of the water with scientific rationalism. I mean, this book is supposed to be about how ridiculous religion is, right?
Well, it is and it isn't. Out of the 370+ pages, I'd say about 100 are devoted to religion and the other 270 are devoted to Dawkins' love affair with Darwin, the majesty of science, and nods to every good book or good friend he's ever read or known. For the most part, you'll read 25 pages of PURE SCIENCE and 2-3 pages explaining how that PURE SCIENCE is relevant to different facets of religion. The problem is that you have to keep reading and reading until Dawkins finally gets the point. There's definitely some excellent parts, but you have to FIND them. I enjoyed a piece about how people think praying for an ill family member or friend will help them get better. But as it turns out, prayer does nothing and some sick people who KNOW they are being prayed for get sicker due to "performance anxiety."
In some ways, I think Bill Maher did a better of pointing out the ill ways of religion in the movie Religulous than Dawkins. Both men focus on organized religion and I hope that in the future, someone will come out and address individual "belief in the supernatural" and how that harms society.
When I got to the end of The God Delusion, I was expecting a lot more from the final chapter, "The Mother of All Burkas." But let me tell you, it didn't wrap the book up, but rather explain how humanity only experiences a very small piece of the world, just like someone wearing a huuuuge burka (representing all that is and can ever be and ever was), peering out through a 1 inch slit. Great, what does this have to do with religion other than mentioning a burka metaphor? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Except, of course, Dawkins is once again praising how amazing the world is, how fulfilling science is, blah blah blah.
This book gets a 7/10. And that's being generous. It's a good topic, the book gives some very good substantial scientific arguments against God and organized religion, but if you're looking for a religious witch-hunt, you won't find it here. The book does not live up to the man who wrote it.
So, I finally finished Richard Dawkins' book, The God Delusion. Yes, yes, I know - it took me 2 months to read, but to be fair, June was not a reading kind of month for me with the new house and all. Anyway, I finished it. I figured out very quickly that the book wasn't what I expected. All the hype about it when it first came out, all the talks I've heard Richard Dawkins' do - I was expecting some sort of blasphemous book that blows religion out of the water with scientific rationalism. I mean, this book is supposed to be about how ridiculous religion is, right?
Well, it is and it isn't. Out of the 370+ pages, I'd say about 100 are devoted to religion and the other 270 are devoted to Dawkins' love affair with Darwin, the majesty of science, and nods to every good book or good friend he's ever read or known. For the most part, you'll read 25 pages of PURE SCIENCE and 2-3 pages explaining how that PURE SCIENCE is relevant to different facets of religion. The problem is that you have to keep reading and reading until Dawkins finally gets the point. There's definitely some excellent parts, but you have to FIND them. I enjoyed a piece about how people think praying for an ill family member or friend will help them get better. But as it turns out, prayer does nothing and some sick people who KNOW they are being prayed for get sicker due to "performance anxiety."
In some ways, I think Bill Maher did a better of pointing out the ill ways of religion in the movie Religulous than Dawkins. Both men focus on organized religion and I hope that in the future, someone will come out and address individual "belief in the supernatural" and how that harms society.
When I got to the end of The God Delusion, I was expecting a lot more from the final chapter, "The Mother of All Burkas." But let me tell you, it didn't wrap the book up, but rather explain how humanity only experiences a very small piece of the world, just like someone wearing a huuuuge burka (representing all that is and can ever be and ever was), peering out through a 1 inch slit. Great, what does this have to do with religion other than mentioning a burka metaphor? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Except, of course, Dawkins is once again praising how amazing the world is, how fulfilling science is, blah blah blah.
This book gets a 7/10. And that's being generous. It's a good topic, the book gives some very good substantial scientific arguments against God and organized religion, but if you're looking for a religious witch-hunt, you won't find it here. The book does not live up to the man who wrote it.
Friday, May 22, 2009
The "Why Am I Still Reading This?" Moment
I've been reading Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion, during the magical amount of time I've been bestowed at the end of the school year. I have to say, though, that while I've meticulously read 190 pages of this book, I'm beginning to have that "Why Am I Still Reading This?" moment. I'm not sure who Dawkins intended to have read his book. Was it the small audience of religious scientists? Was it athiests who wanted some substance to support their lack of belief? Was it religious people ready to open their minds or simply...curious? The two latter audiences will struggle to get through the chapters. Dawkins loves quoting everyone. EVERYONE! And everything has some weird analogy that bleeds into other chapters...an analogy you'll forget after blubbering through another 20 pages. For example, "skyhook," and a "PAP" agnostic...huh?!
The book reads more like a well-crafted research paper that goes on for 300 pages and has some entertaining moments. But I don't think it's meant for the average person. It's for the science community, religious or atheistic. For the average person, get the Cliffsnotes version by watch Richard Dawkins talk about his book on YouTube. It's a lot less painful and a lot more entertaining.
When I first started reading this book, there was a small section that really, really drew me in. Dawkins was talking about how religious groups get undeserved respect and are even consulted in political policy. I was excited. But that was 160 pages ago. There has been no "OMG! REALLY? I MUST READ ON!" moments since then and yet I keep reading. Maybe it's because I'm already this far in that I feel like if I give up now, it'll be a cop out. The titles of the upcoming chapters sound interesting, but then again, the chapter I'm on now "The Origin of Religion," sounded interesting and yet, has turned out to be nothing like what I expected. It's about memes...great. I was hoping for something more anthropological, but no, Dawkins only wants to focus on what he thinks will be DARWIN'S idea of how religion functions. I would like a count on how many times the name Darwin appears in this book, kind of like the count of the word "fuck" in The Big Lebowski. Darwin, Darwin, Darwin....
The book reads more like a well-crafted research paper that goes on for 300 pages and has some entertaining moments. But I don't think it's meant for the average person. It's for the science community, religious or atheistic. For the average person, get the Cliffsnotes version by watch Richard Dawkins talk about his book on YouTube. It's a lot less painful and a lot more entertaining.
When I first started reading this book, there was a small section that really, really drew me in. Dawkins was talking about how religious groups get undeserved respect and are even consulted in political policy. I was excited. But that was 160 pages ago. There has been no "OMG! REALLY? I MUST READ ON!" moments since then and yet I keep reading. Maybe it's because I'm already this far in that I feel like if I give up now, it'll be a cop out. The titles of the upcoming chapters sound interesting, but then again, the chapter I'm on now "The Origin of Religion," sounded interesting and yet, has turned out to be nothing like what I expected. It's about memes...great. I was hoping for something more anthropological, but no, Dawkins only wants to focus on what he thinks will be DARWIN'S idea of how religion functions. I would like a count on how many times the name Darwin appears in this book, kind of like the count of the word "fuck" in The Big Lebowski. Darwin, Darwin, Darwin....
Monday, May 18, 2009
Way to teach kids INTOLERANCE
I had to read the book Crash by Jerry Spinelli to teach the book to a small group of 7th grade students. Jerry Spinelli is a Newbery Award winner for Maniac Magee, a book I'm sure you've heard of. But this book, Crash, which won a few respectable book awards is just awful!
The book is about a boy named Crash, a nickname he received after he "crashed tackled" into his cousin when he received a new football helmet for Christmas. Crash torments his neighbor, Penn Ward - a nerdy vegetarian Quaker who doesn't believe in violence, gets his clothes from a thirft shop, and has a pet turtle who rides around in Penn's only toy, a wooden train or something. Throughout most of the book, Crash is boasting about his football abilities and when he's not doing that, he ridicules Penn Ward while feeling entitled to dance/befriend the prettiest girl in school to the point at which he resorts to force to get her attention. UGH!
The supposed "redeeming" point for Crash is when he makes a connection between his ailing grandfather and Penn's great-grandfather who wants nothing more than to see Penn run at the Penn Relays. Crash, who is faster than Penn, purposely loses a qualifying race to Penn so that Penn can go to the Penn Relays. Great, so for 120 pages, Crash is a huge, egotistical, ignorant ***hole and the reader is supposed to feel happy that he's changed for the remaining 30 pages. NO. I hate this character with a passion. I hate what he stands for and I hate how I'm supposed to believe this character has really changed! Please...it was nice that he lost the race, but there's no way in hell that these guys are going to be friends. Crash will continue to harass Penn for being a Quaker and a vegetarian. And if he is nice to Penn, it's only for the sake of keeping the prettiest girl in school as his girlfriend. How shallow.
I felt this book almost taught intolerance and selfishness to my young reader's minds. For example, Crash criticizes Penn for being Quaker and not believing in violence of any sort. He takes advantage of the poor guy, soaking him with a watergun and Penn just stands there and takes it. During the literature circle discussions that occurred after reading the first 8 chapters, one of my students exclaimed, "Penn deserved it. We live in a violent world! Learn to live with it!" What a good way to teach kids religious tolerance let alone peace!
I give this book a 3/10. It's a complex story and a fast read, but it has a lot of bad blood that's hard to overlook.
The book is about a boy named Crash, a nickname he received after he "crashed tackled" into his cousin when he received a new football helmet for Christmas. Crash torments his neighbor, Penn Ward - a nerdy vegetarian Quaker who doesn't believe in violence, gets his clothes from a thirft shop, and has a pet turtle who rides around in Penn's only toy, a wooden train or something. Throughout most of the book, Crash is boasting about his football abilities and when he's not doing that, he ridicules Penn Ward while feeling entitled to dance/befriend the prettiest girl in school to the point at which he resorts to force to get her attention. UGH!
The supposed "redeeming" point for Crash is when he makes a connection between his ailing grandfather and Penn's great-grandfather who wants nothing more than to see Penn run at the Penn Relays. Crash, who is faster than Penn, purposely loses a qualifying race to Penn so that Penn can go to the Penn Relays. Great, so for 120 pages, Crash is a huge, egotistical, ignorant ***hole and the reader is supposed to feel happy that he's changed for the remaining 30 pages. NO. I hate this character with a passion. I hate what he stands for and I hate how I'm supposed to believe this character has really changed! Please...it was nice that he lost the race, but there's no way in hell that these guys are going to be friends. Crash will continue to harass Penn for being a Quaker and a vegetarian. And if he is nice to Penn, it's only for the sake of keeping the prettiest girl in school as his girlfriend. How shallow.
I felt this book almost taught intolerance and selfishness to my young reader's minds. For example, Crash criticizes Penn for being Quaker and not believing in violence of any sort. He takes advantage of the poor guy, soaking him with a watergun and Penn just stands there and takes it. During the literature circle discussions that occurred after reading the first 8 chapters, one of my students exclaimed, "Penn deserved it. We live in a violent world! Learn to live with it!" What a good way to teach kids religious tolerance let alone peace!
I give this book a 3/10. It's a complex story and a fast read, but it has a lot of bad blood that's hard to overlook.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
A Niche of Time To Read
It's been a while since I've posted here, mainly because I haven't been reading anything substantial. I got a new job in January and poof, my free time to read disappeared. But I have finished one book in the past 2 days due to having to teach it to a couple of 6th grade students:
Holes by Louis Sachar is a great read! It reminded me of a more reader-friendly Lord of the Flies, except there's adults involved and upheld rules. The reason why it reminds me of Lord of the Flies is because it's about a group of boys removed from civilization. There's many books out there that examine a microcosm of the greater world, removing people from civilization and watching what they do. It certainly makes it an easier book to write! The 6th grade class that read it seemed to enjoy it, except for a few students. Well, you can't please everyone!
I'll give it a 9/10. I'm deducting a point because the whole great-great-great grandfather and great-great grandfather and all the lineage was too hard for me to follow. I couldn't figure out who was who without having to flip back and so, of course, the ending for me required even more research. Which Stanley Yelnats does the suitcase belong to? How is he related to the little boy, also named Stanley Yelnats?
My current read, a book I can only read at home, is The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. Dawkins is articulate, bold, and reasonable in his arguments against a supernatural god. I was not impressed with his beginning chapter on Einstein's religious beliefs. Okay, so people misconstrued Einstein's religious beliefs - who cares? Perhaps that chapter is more for the religious scientist reader. For someone like me, it's out of place. One of my favorite sections so far is "Undeserved Respect."
Unfortunately, I have some things I need to get done so I'll have to write about it later.
Holes by Louis Sachar is a great read! It reminded me of a more reader-friendly Lord of the Flies, except there's adults involved and upheld rules. The reason why it reminds me of Lord of the Flies is because it's about a group of boys removed from civilization. There's many books out there that examine a microcosm of the greater world, removing people from civilization and watching what they do. It certainly makes it an easier book to write! The 6th grade class that read it seemed to enjoy it, except for a few students. Well, you can't please everyone!
I'll give it a 9/10. I'm deducting a point because the whole great-great-great grandfather and great-great grandfather and all the lineage was too hard for me to follow. I couldn't figure out who was who without having to flip back and so, of course, the ending for me required even more research. Which Stanley Yelnats does the suitcase belong to? How is he related to the little boy, also named Stanley Yelnats?
My current read, a book I can only read at home, is The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. Dawkins is articulate, bold, and reasonable in his arguments against a supernatural god. I was not impressed with his beginning chapter on Einstein's religious beliefs. Okay, so people misconstrued Einstein's religious beliefs - who cares? Perhaps that chapter is more for the religious scientist reader. For someone like me, it's out of place. One of my favorite sections so far is "Undeserved Respect."
Unfortunately, I have some things I need to get done so I'll have to write about it later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)